Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30414609›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2018

Efficacy of continuous in-wound infusion of levobupivacaine and ketorolac for post-caesarean section analgesia: a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Jozica Wagner-Kovacec, Petra Povalej-Brzan, Dusan Mekis

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jozica Wagner-KovacecDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Management, University Medical Centre Maribor, Ljubljanska ulica 5, 2000, Maribor, Slovenia. jozica.wagner-kovacec@guest.arnes.si.ORCID 0000-0002-3258-6654
Petra Povalej-BrzanFaculty for Health Sciences, University of Maribor, Žitna ulica 15, 2000, Maribor, Slovenia.
Dusan MekisDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Management, University Medical Centre Maribor, Ljubljanska ulica 5, 2000, Maribor, Slovenia.
University of Maribor · SIUniversity Clinical Centre Maribor · SI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn-wound catheters for infusion of local anaesthetic for post-caesarean section analgesia are well tolerated in parturients. Few studies have examined continuous in-wound infusion of a combination of local anaesthetic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for post-caesarean section analgesia. This single centre study evaluated post-operative analgesic efficacy and piritramide-sparing effects of continuous in-wound infusion of either local anaesthetic or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agent, or the combination of both, versus saline placebo, when added to systemic analgesia with paracetamol.

methodsAfter National Ethical Board approval, 59 pregnant women scheduled for non-emergency caesarean section were included in this prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. The parturients received spinal anaesthesia with levobupivacaine and fentanyl. Post-operative analgesia to 48 h included paracetamol 1000 mg intravenously every 6 h, with the studied agents as in-wound infusions. Rescue analgesia with piritramide was available as needed, titrated to 2 mg intravenously. Four groups were compared, using a subcutaneous multi-holed catheter connected to an elastomeric pump running at 5 mL/h over 48 h. The different in-wound infusions were: levobupivacaine 0.25% alone; ketorolac tromethamine 0.08% alone; levobupivacaine 0.25% plus ketorolac tromethamine 0.08%; or saline placebo. The primary outcome was total rescue piritramide used at 24 h and 48 h post-operatively, under maintained optimal post-caesarean section analgesia.

resultsCompared to placebo in-wound infusions, ketorolac alone and levobupivacaine plus ketorolac in-wound infusions both significantly reduced post-operative piritramide consumption at 24 h (p = 0.003; p < 0.001, respectively) and 48 h (p = 0.001; p < 0.001). Compared to levobupivacaine, levobupivacaine plus ketorolac significantly reduced post-operative piritramide consumption at 24 h (p = 0.015) and 48 h (p = 0.021). For levobupivacaine versus ketorolac, no significant differences were seen for post-operative piritramide consumption at 24 h and 48 h (p = 0.141; p = 0.054).

conclusionContinuous in-wound infusion with levobupivacaine plus ketorolac provides greater opioid-sparing effects than continuous in-wound infusion with levobupivacaine alone.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register: retrospectively registered on 30 July, 2014, DRKS 00006559 .

Indexed as

AdultAnesthetics, LocalCesarean SectionDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansInfusions, IntralesionalKetorolacLevobupivacainePain MeasurementPostoperative PainPregnancyProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAnesthetics, LocalKetorolacLevobupivacaineAnalgesiaCaesarean sectionIn-wound infusionKetorolacLevobupivacaine

Identifiers

PMID30414609
PMCPMC6234771
OpenAlexW2899925711

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.